JRHS Writing BLOG

Single-gender Education, is it right?

Single-gender Education, is it right?

It’s been proven at the Thurgood Marshall Elementary school in Seattle that boys succeed far more when separated from the girls.  In 2000, these elementary students had the worst scores in the state.  Those scores, however, were given before the gender separation.  Now, the boys and girls are in different classrooms, are taught universal material, and are greatly succeeding. 
This article, written by Mark Bergin from World Magazine, is called “No Girls Allowed; single-sex schools help African-American boys succeed- but remain controversial.” Bergin writes that, “…some feminists contend that any notion of neurological or social differences between boys and girls amounts to sexism” (Bergin, 31).  This, however, would not and should not be the goal of gender segregation.  On the contrary, separation of boys and girls gives the children the opportunity to grow into their full potential.  “Thurgood Marshall principal Winifred Todd…says the single-sex environment actually breaks gender sterotypes.  Girls are more willing to apply themselves in math, science, and physical education without fear of ridicule.  Conversely, the boys… take no issue with a class on knitting” (Bergin, 31).
There are many aspects of single gender education that are positive and some negative.  Some parents, who have the wealth, send their children to elite private schools in order to provide for them a good, single sex education.  Personally, I think that complete single gender education could build barriers between girls and boys and could discourage as well as motivate them in participating in those previously mentioned activities.  So, if the single-sex education is a good thing, then I believe that boys and girls should have healthy interactions. 
Without clarification, this article and my opinion could be misunderstood.  For elementary education, the single gender education seems to work, but once the children reach junior high and high school ages, I think that mixing the sexes is a healthy and necessary action.  Mixing boys and girls is an important exercise, especially in training young people for marriage.  This preparation is critical in their development and in how they will carry out their marriages.  Having young men learn chilvary among young women, and having young ladies learn to be ladies is so crucial.  If, however, the sexes are separated throughout their entire education, the life applications necessary to a healthy marriage are not learned.  Also, this could encourage young people to accept alternative sexual lifestyles. So, in conclusion, I believe that if they are so separated that they don’t have a chance to know or understand each other, eventually a form of discrimination between the gender might evolve.

World Magazine. No Girls Allowed.  Mark Bergin. February 3, 2007. 

Without clarification, this article and my opinion could be misunderstood. 

***Yes. I’m afraid the paragraph before this left me totally befuddled about your opinion. You clarified it in the following paragraphs, so let me take issue with a few of your points.

You wrote: Mixing boys and girls is an important exercise, especially in training young people for marriage.  This preparation is critical in their development and in how they will carry out their marriages.

**** How exactly does it do this? In my recollection of boy/girl relationships in school is that it simply provided us with lots of “divorce practice.” We would give our hearts (and often our bodies) to each other, and then practice ripping ourselves away from one another. Is this a good thing? How does this prepare us for marriage?

You wrote: Having young men learn chilvary among young women, and having young ladies learn to be ladies is so crucial.  If, however, the sexes are separated throughout their entire education, the life applications necessary to a healthy marriage are not learned. 

****Do you really think that if a student attends a single sex school that they have NO interaction with the opposite sex? This reminds me of the specious arguments against home-schooling that children will lack social interaction as if random and unsupervised social interaction is always and inherently good. I’m guessing that you go to church? Since your name is Cali, I’m assuming you are a girl. (forgive me if I am wrong, and make the proper corrections as you read this). Do you meet boys at church? Do you interact with fathers, brothers, and/or uncles in your family? Do these relationships have any impact on how you understand and relate to other boys your age? Think carefully about this question.

What’s more, you should be more specific about what are these “lessons” you refer to. Most of the lesson I recall from my mixed gender experience were not necessarily spiritually uplifting ones.

You wrote: Also, this could encourage young people to accept alternative sexual lifestyles.

**** Oh my! This is a huge unsupported assertion. Kind of unfair to toss this in without unpacking it.

You wrote: So, in conclusion, I believe that if they are so separated that they don’t have a chance to know or understand each other, eventually a form of discrimination between the gender might evolve.

****What form of discrimination are you talking about? And why is it bad?

Your if statement is huge. You totally fail to address the issue of whether single sex ed really does prevent young people from knowing and understanding one another. I doubt that it does. The burden of proof is on you.

Thank you Dubbadee for your insightful comments.  Your critique of what I wrote made me realize how I could be misconstrued.  My argument against single sex education was primarily aimed for the junior high/ high school age group.  My vote for single gender education for elementary students still stands.
First of all, when you asked how mixing the genders is preparing them for marriage, I think my point was misinterpreted.  I was not referring to coupling the junior high and high school students and teaching them to give their hearts and bodies to each other.  My point was meant to be on a much broader level such as chivalry (i.e. holding a door or giving up a seat for a young lady).  By supporting the gender mix, I was not proposing a pro-dating argument.  I agree that the act of giving hearts and bodies, and then ripping away and beginning the process again can be seen as divorce practice.  This is not a good thing.  Hopefully, now you see that what I wrote in my original blog was not referring to relationships as much as it was referring to respectful chivalry that is utilized in marriage.
Now, to address the following question: “Do these relationships [those had with boys in church and family members] have any impact on how you understand and relate to other boys your age?” I must say yes; the interactions I have with young men at church and those I have as family do impact how I relate to and understand other guys my age.  However, not all young people have the same opportunities that I do when it comes to church life and family.  Furthermore, I believe that the lack of social interactions for home schoolers begins to be an issue when they reach high school and still aren’t interacting with other students, even other home schoolers.  The reason I state my opinion so boldly concerning home schooling is because I was home schooled throughout grade school and into part of my middle school education and that is what I’ve observed.
For now, this is all I will address.  If more explanation is desired, I will be happy to oblige.  I hope this was satisfactory for clearing up the misunderstandings.